dom
Well-known member
Although you might find many Clipper skippers mostly in agreement with the MAIB.
Which adds to why openly attacking the MCA is a high risk strategy. People under oath -- if it gets to that -- tend to tell the truth
Clipper Ventures declares war on MCA & MAIB?
- Thread starter dunedin
- Start date
Although you might find many Clipper skippers mostly in agreement with the MAIB.
Which adds to why openly attacking the MCA is a high risk strategy. People under oath -- if it gets to that -- tend to tell the truth
thinwater
Well-known member
Obviously true. But...
* Can you be sure, in the heat of battle, that no one will ever clip some where they should not? Can you be sure you will not clip incorrectly? I am a very experienced climber and have been aware of the problem for 40 years, but I am not sure I won't make mistakes in the dark.
* It failed under little more than body weight (500 pounds). Not acceptable.
* There are UIAA and ISO standards Spinlock elected to ignore. Everyone else meets them.
I'm not sayin' this is Clipper's fault. Maybe a little, since the gear has been obsolete for a while, but Spinlock supplied it. I'm blaming Spinlock some, because they knew better, but it did meet the minimum standard. Really, I'm blaming standards groups, and mostly, the MAIB for not saying "we need a new standard" in plain language. That is their job, as I see it.
And the standard they need exists and is decades old!!
lw395
Well-known member
Or maybe the standard for fall prevention in ordinary leisure yachts is not appropriate for fall arrest on a much bigger faster vessel in a commercial context?
I think there are other standards for offshore harnesses, used for instance on oil rigs.
I think there are other standards for offshore harnesses, used for instance on oil rigs.
oldmanofthehills
Well-known member
Like Thinwater I am a climber, if a fading one.
I have been aware of sideload failure potential for man years. I take care to try and never clip so as to risk it. But and its big but, in climbing I am never ever on a single clip once I start moving up. I am taught to get two clips on as fast as possible. (If the higher fails I might fall but should be restrained by the lower one). What is more in Trad I am taught to evaluate the protection that an individual piece of gear might give.
On Clipper trips folks clip to a pre-prepared jackstay with a single clip. The importance of this single clip is thus much greater. Many things could be done: Better clips, centre line jackstay where possible, netting between stanchions, double clips so once on station a short leash can be applied without disconnecting long leash.
I note Spinlock advised of side load risk, so don't think they are to blame. Its Clipper that could have changed the gear or usage not Spinlock
I have been aware of sideload failure potential for man years. I take care to try and never clip so as to risk it. But and its big but, in climbing I am never ever on a single clip once I start moving up. I am taught to get two clips on as fast as possible. (If the higher fails I might fall but should be restrained by the lower one). What is more in Trad I am taught to evaluate the protection that an individual piece of gear might give.
On Clipper trips folks clip to a pre-prepared jackstay with a single clip. The importance of this single clip is thus much greater. Many things could be done: Better clips, centre line jackstay where possible, netting between stanchions, double clips so once on station a short leash can be applied without disconnecting long leash.
I note Spinlock advised of side load risk, so don't think they are to blame. Its Clipper that could have changed the gear or usage not Spinlock
Tintin
Well-known member
Clipper have full length netting.
SOP's in include double clipping on short length when in position and if feasible for the deck work.
The tethers have 3 clips.
Just a few facts amidst the supposition
Resolution
Well-known member
Thinwater, I think you have researched the subject of tethers and commented on them in an earlier thread. Putting aside for a moment the question of which of MAIB and Clipper is more right or wrong, the real lesson to be learnt from all of this is simple:
Which is the best lifejacket / tether / hook system for ordinary sailors ?
Can you refresh us on your current conclusions?
Strikeliner
Member
Dunno how Thinwater is supposed to know whats best but I hope its a Spinlock 'cos that's wot they are using this time.
Uricanejack
Well-known member
Nothing to do with clipper the MAIB or even sailing.
I have had some involvement with similar investigations. It’s quite a shock when you wake up in the morning and find out the national news has a story about a fatal incident involving your organization, people you know, and you could have been on the shop floor responsible for the incident.
Fortunately every time it’s happened I have not been personally involved. I have just known those who were. I end up dealing with the aftermath.
Hopefully I will have retired before the next fatal incident. Odds are I will wake up to the news of a couple more serious incidents before then.
You can never completely eliminate the risk of an incident occurring. All you can do is your best to reduce the risk to as low a practical. Or reasonably practical.
When incidents happen. I am usually shocked to hear who was involved. One was the guy who trained me. Another was a mentor. I thought they were good people. They still made critical errors. Which were not caught.
Clipper have had a couple of fatal incidents within a short period of time. The MAIB role is to investigate and determine how, why, and most importantly what can be changed to help reduce the chances of it happening again. They do not find fault.
The MAIB are trying to help.
One of my greatest concerns after an incident. Is trying to convince other individuals who were not involved. They have to change the way they do things. If they don’t we are probably going to repeat the incident.
Bottom line I can tell Clipper needs to change the way they do things or it will happen again. Nothing specific I will leave that to the MAIB. It’s just the way the odds work.
Resisting change will not help.
I have had some involvement with similar investigations. It’s quite a shock when you wake up in the morning and find out the national news has a story about a fatal incident involving your organization, people you know, and you could have been on the shop floor responsible for the incident.
Fortunately every time it’s happened I have not been personally involved. I have just known those who were. I end up dealing with the aftermath.
Hopefully I will have retired before the next fatal incident. Odds are I will wake up to the news of a couple more serious incidents before then.
You can never completely eliminate the risk of an incident occurring. All you can do is your best to reduce the risk to as low a practical. Or reasonably practical.
When incidents happen. I am usually shocked to hear who was involved. One was the guy who trained me. Another was a mentor. I thought they were good people. They still made critical errors. Which were not caught.
Clipper have had a couple of fatal incidents within a short period of time. The MAIB role is to investigate and determine how, why, and most importantly what can be changed to help reduce the chances of it happening again. They do not find fault.
The MAIB are trying to help.
One of my greatest concerns after an incident. Is trying to convince other individuals who were not involved. They have to change the way they do things. If they don’t we are probably going to repeat the incident.
Bottom line I can tell Clipper needs to change the way they do things or it will happen again. Nothing specific I will leave that to the MAIB. It’s just the way the odds work.
Resisting change will not help.
thinwater
Well-known member
Incorrect. In fact, industrial standards (ISO, OSHA, and ANSI) are much more demanding yet!!
We are talking ONLY about recreational and leisure standards here.
thinwater
Well-known member
Look at Spinlock's web page. They are obviously discontinuing the Gibb-style (the type that failed) and have introduced a new line using the Kong Tango Type K UIAA 1211 clips. If Clipper is still using Gibb-style hooks it is because they have old stock.
I have every reason to believe the Performance lines are very good. I know the clips are, and the webbing did not fail. The only problem we know of or even suspect was the obsolete clip design.
https://www.spinlock.co.uk/en/categories/safety-lines
[Note that the original Gibb hook was forged SS and was different in design from the current Spinlock and Plastimo Gibb-style. The old clips were probably stronger in a side load, but lacking testing, any opinion is guesswork. The forged hooks are no longer produced.]
Last edited:
thinwater
Well-known member
Regarding harnesses, the most important factors are probably not the design, but the fit:
* Fit tightly enough that it cannot come over your shoulders. Most PFDs are fitted FAR too loose to function as harnesses.
* Wear crotch straps (two separate straps, one on each side, or leg loops, are more practical). Without these, you may slip out, as a few have. That said, the straps are NOT designed to hold a fall and are only rated at body weight. Som have been documented to fail while hoisting only, during MOB drills. Not very reassuring....
Why don't you ask the PFD manufacturers why the leg straps are only rated at body weight? I asked several, and the responses were unsatisfactory. They could be built to take the load and be more comfortable than current designs, but they are not. Perhaps there is no market interest. In fact, the great majority of sailors don't wear PFDs and very, very few run jacklines.
https://www.practical-sailor.com/issues/44_12/features/Leg-Straps-Put-the-Load-on-Fanny_12517-1.html
* Fit tightly enough that it cannot come over your shoulders. Most PFDs are fitted FAR too loose to function as harnesses.
* Wear crotch straps (two separate straps, one on each side, or leg loops, are more practical). Without these, you may slip out, as a few have. That said, the straps are NOT designed to hold a fall and are only rated at body weight. Som have been documented to fail while hoisting only, during MOB drills. Not very reassuring....
Why don't you ask the PFD manufacturers why the leg straps are only rated at body weight? I asked several, and the responses were unsatisfactory. They could be built to take the load and be more comfortable than current designs, but they are not. Perhaps there is no market interest. In fact, the great majority of sailors don't wear PFDs and very, very few run jacklines.
https://www.practical-sailor.com/issues/44_12/features/Leg-Straps-Put-the-Load-on-Fanny_12517-1.html
grumpy_o_g
Well-known member
If the shock loading characteristics for lateral (or any other) loadings are higher for fall prevention that for fall arrest someone needs to re-write the specifications....
grumpy_o_g
Well-known member
I agree totally here. Surely just about all crotch straps are designed to stop the lifejacket riding up when the wearer is in the water so wouldn't be designed to have the full body weight as either SWL or from an ergonomic perspective? That's what I've always assumed and I really don't fancy being lifted out of freezing water by even a couple of 1" webbing straps - that would be about 100Kg on them if you lifted a largish bloke out. It's also a huge load on the heart of the casualty given temperatures and the angle he/she is being lifted at. Ignoring the angle of lift the LJ would need to be similar to a climbing harness - Petzl know more about this than most and this is their high-end offering (actually it looks a little like something from a specialist lingerie catalogue in that photo
). Something like that would be pretty wearable on board but it still needs something that can keep you attached to the boat and tow you on your back.https://www.petzl.com/GB/en/Sport/Harnesses/SITTA
Neeves
Well-known member
The Petzl design, and many other reputable products of similar designs from other manufacturers, is excellent for what it does. I use one for mast work and many foredeck hands, on large racing yachts, use them similarly. They are comfortable and you can wear them for prolonged periods. They do not replace a harness, as they have no shoulder straps (so wear both).
As you say they don't keep you attached to the yacht nor tow you on your back - but that is an easy fix. Good hooks are available off the shelf - sourcing a good tether is easy.
It would be easy for a manufacturer, or decent sailmaker, to fit those leg straps to a current harness or fit shoulder straps from a current harness to one of the illustrated devices.
As Thinwater says - there does not appear to be a market demand.
I think if you were to ask around (on this forum) you might find that a combined design has been trialled - but no interest was shown in the concept (or the concept was not marketed with sufficient vigour). Which raises an interesting point - I know a design has been developed and I know there is interest here - but I suspect that design if flaunted here to tune the design and assess reaction with a view to it being marketed - would be banned as it would break the T & C. Yes it would be made for profit - but it should save lives. Go figure!
The problem currently being - there are all the ideas out there, there is all the equipment out there, if you read the correct magazines (see Thinwater's link) the theory, practice, omissions and mistakes are defined.
Sadly you have to do all this your self, read there articles, find the hook, find the tether, buy a Pezl harness, buy a conventional harness and then marry them all together. The finished device would obviously not meet any of the specified requirements (as it would not have been tested) - even if it was bullet proof. Then you need to ensure there are strong points in the right place and ensure the jacklines are also in the right place and are 'safe' lines.
Like an anchor rode (sorry) you should be able to go to one place and source exactly what is needed without faffing about buying one item here and another there. It should all fit and each component should be of the correct strength and to a similar specification. The device should be dated and a sensible lifespan indicated (the spec printed in UV sensitive ink - might be an idea)
When you think about it - its not difficult - Jacklines, harness, tether, hook. Strong points are slightly different issue - but advice could be given when you buy the rest of the kit.
Now tell me who does this sort of thing (with some knowledge behind them).
Then tell me that YBW would allow the members to help develop a new harness to be sold commercially.
And to be perfectly clear - I have nothing to do with the new muted design, I have no commercial interest in the idea, I happened to be introduced to the idea (which I thought refreshingly good) and shared the disappointment that it would not run. Frustratingly - there is expertise here and huge depth of knowledge that might tune the design and indicate the actual level of interest in the market place - but it, YBW, cannot be used by a gifted and knowledgeable amateur to hone and prove their ideas. The 'new' harness could be matched, perfectly with a defined hook (or hooks) and tether - and eventually sold all in one bag.
If you ask how I know YBW would raise its eyebrows (and consider a ban) - I was interrogated closely in commencing an anchor thread on whether I had a commercial interest in the design, was going to test the design, was going to write an article on the design. I believe the interrogation was initiated by a member and picked up by the, or a, Mod. Part and parcel of the interrogation was also a query as to whether the design infringed copyright or registered design (which it did not).
So if this post is deleted - I will not be surprised.
Jonathan
As you say they don't keep you attached to the yacht nor tow you on your back - but that is an easy fix. Good hooks are available off the shelf - sourcing a good tether is easy.
It would be easy for a manufacturer, or decent sailmaker, to fit those leg straps to a current harness or fit shoulder straps from a current harness to one of the illustrated devices.
As Thinwater says - there does not appear to be a market demand.
I think if you were to ask around (on this forum) you might find that a combined design has been trialled - but no interest was shown in the concept (or the concept was not marketed with sufficient vigour). Which raises an interesting point - I know a design has been developed and I know there is interest here - but I suspect that design if flaunted here to tune the design and assess reaction with a view to it being marketed - would be banned as it would break the T & C. Yes it would be made for profit - but it should save lives. Go figure!
The problem currently being - there are all the ideas out there, there is all the equipment out there, if you read the correct magazines (see Thinwater's link) the theory, practice, omissions and mistakes are defined.
Sadly you have to do all this your self, read there articles, find the hook, find the tether, buy a Pezl harness, buy a conventional harness and then marry them all together. The finished device would obviously not meet any of the specified requirements (as it would not have been tested) - even if it was bullet proof. Then you need to ensure there are strong points in the right place and ensure the jacklines are also in the right place and are 'safe' lines.
Like an anchor rode (sorry) you should be able to go to one place and source exactly what is needed without faffing about buying one item here and another there. It should all fit and each component should be of the correct strength and to a similar specification. The device should be dated and a sensible lifespan indicated (the spec printed in UV sensitive ink - might be an idea)
When you think about it - its not difficult - Jacklines, harness, tether, hook. Strong points are slightly different issue - but advice could be given when you buy the rest of the kit.
Now tell me who does this sort of thing (with some knowledge behind them).
Then tell me that YBW would allow the members to help develop a new harness to be sold commercially.
And to be perfectly clear - I have nothing to do with the new muted design, I have no commercial interest in the idea, I happened to be introduced to the idea (which I thought refreshingly good) and shared the disappointment that it would not run. Frustratingly - there is expertise here and huge depth of knowledge that might tune the design and indicate the actual level of interest in the market place - but it, YBW, cannot be used by a gifted and knowledgeable amateur to hone and prove their ideas. The 'new' harness could be matched, perfectly with a defined hook (or hooks) and tether - and eventually sold all in one bag.
If you ask how I know YBW would raise its eyebrows (and consider a ban) - I was interrogated closely in commencing an anchor thread on whether I had a commercial interest in the design, was going to test the design, was going to write an article on the design. I believe the interrogation was initiated by a member and picked up by the, or a, Mod. Part and parcel of the interrogation was also a query as to whether the design infringed copyright or registered design (which it did not).
So if this post is deleted - I will not be surprised.
Jonathan
Last edited:
JumbleDuck
Well-known member
It's a very good question. Some of the leg straps I have seen have been so flimsy that I suspect they are only there for marketing. It's not only the 1" webbing - it's the cheap and cheerful nylon clips.
Neeves
Well-known member
I think mandatory inclusion of leg or crotch straps were introduced in the, very early, '90s. At the time they were unavailable (in HK) and we were recommended to sew tape on (with JD's mention , of which he does not approve, of cheap and cheerful plastic clips) It is amazing that they have received so little, or no, attention and are still not much better than the quick fix, of afterthought, offered to us today.
Jonathan
Jonathan
penberth3
Well-known member
There should be no shock loading with fall prevention!
Stemar
Well-known member
Wouldn't be, if the prevention device, whatever it is, has no slack. Since we're talking about the real world, there's likely to be slack, so shock loading will occur. Not as much as a climber who's dropped several metres before the line tensions, but enough to need a decent margin of strength.
As a pragmatic sailor, I recognise that things won't always be ideal. I therefore want kit that will function in less than ideal conditions, including clipping on the wrong way, even though I rarely leave the Solent.
There are two popular acronyms in health and safety. BATNIEC - Best Available Technology Not Involving Excessive Cost and CATNAP - Cheapest Available Technology Narrowly Avoiding Prosecution. The Southern Ocean is an inherently dangerous place; it seems to me that It behoves those whose business is taking inexperienced sailors there should be using the former acronym, rather than the latter.
Kukri
Well-known member
I have read down this thread and been reminded of a memorable day out on the Solent aboard one of a pair of Clipper yachts as a guest of the MCA. A great day out as one boat contained the good and the great of the yachting Press and the other contained a rough and ready bunch press ganged from the reprobates of the Merchant Navy, of which your correspondent was the least notable. We thrashed them, mainly because we set a spinnaker and they piked...
The only time I have met Sir R K-J, who impressed me a lot.
Clearly relationships have gone far down hill since then. This is a pity.
The only time I have met Sir R K-J, who impressed me a lot.
Clearly relationships have gone far down hill since then. This is a pity.
oldmanofthehills
Well-known member
Thankyou for that detail, now I can justify looking at the Forum in work breaks and will introduce these acronyms to the Railways as fast as possible. I am a clear champion of what you term BATNIEC but can now shorthand the alternative.
